Hello. Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Right. Locations of inserting security_path_set()/security_path_clear() pairs > > are subset of mnt_want_write()/mnt_drop_write() pairs. Thus, we can insert > > security_path_set()/security_path_clear() pairs into > > mnt_want_write()/mnt_drop_write() pairs, if we can tolerate performance > > regression. According to our rough measurement, there is about 8 - 22% of > > performance regression. > > ... compared to what, exactly? > > If having CONFIG_SECURITY_PATH=y but TOMOYO disabled has this kind of > regression against just not having CONFIG_SECURITY_PATH, then no that is > not acceptable. > Comparison between a module using mnt_path.c and a module not using mnt_path.c . If mp_update_mnt_path() is not called, there is no performance regression. TOMOYO will need mp_update_mnt_path(). Regards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
